Efficacy and Safety of Dexlansoprazole MR Compared to Placebo on Maintaining Healing in Subjects With Healed Erosive Esophagitis

NCT ID: NCT00321737

Last Updated: 2012-02-03

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

445 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2006-05-31

Study Completion Date

2007-05-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to assess the ability of once-daily (QD) treatment with dexlansoprazole modified release (MR) 30 mg and 60 mg or placebo in maintaining healing of erosive esophagitis (EE).

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This is a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled, 6 month maintenance study. The study is designed to compare the efficacy and safety of daily dexlansoprazole MR (30 mg and 60 mg) with that of placebo, in maintaining healing of EE.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Esophagitis, Reflux Esophagitis, Peptic

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

TRIPLE

Participants Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Dexlansoprazole MR 30 mg QD

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Dexlansoprazole MR

Intervention Type DRUG

Dexlansoprazole MR 30 mg, capsules, orally, once daily for up to six months.

Dexlansoprazole MR 60 mg QD

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Dexlansoprazole MR

Intervention Type DRUG

Dexlansoprazole MR 60 mg, orally, once daily for up to six months.

Placebo

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Placebo

Intervention Type DRUG

Dexlansoprazole placebo-matching capsules, orally, once daily for up to six months.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Dexlansoprazole MR

Dexlansoprazole MR 30 mg, capsules, orally, once daily for up to six months.

Intervention Type DRUG

Dexlansoprazole MR

Dexlansoprazole MR 60 mg, orally, once daily for up to six months.

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo

Dexlansoprazole placebo-matching capsules, orally, once daily for up to six months.

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

TAK-390MR Kapidex Dexilant TAK-390MR Kapidex Dexilant

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Subjects must have successfully completed the Phase 3 Study T-EE04-084 (NCT00251693) or T-EE04-085 (NCT00251719); and have healed esophageal erosions proven by endoscopy. Complete healing was assessed for change in LA Esophagitis Classification grades A, B, C, or D to healed (defined as anything less than the criterion for Grade A). The subject was counted as healed if endoscopy findings did not meet the Grade A criterion.

Exclusion Criteria

* Use of prescription or nonprescription proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine (H2) receptor antagonists, sucralfate, misoprostol, or prokinetics throughout the study.
* Use of antacids (except for study supplied) throughout the study.
* Use of drugs with significant anticholinergic effects such as tricyclics who cannot stay on a stable dose throughout the study.
* Chronic (\>12 doses per month) use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors.
* Need for continuous anticoagulant therapy.
* Evidence of uncontrolled systemic disease.
* Subjects who have participated in either maintenance study (T-EE04-086 \[NCT00255164\] or T-EE04-087 \[NCT00255151\]).
* Subjects who, in the opinion of the investigator, is unable to comply with the requirements of the study or is unsuitable for any reason.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Takeda

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Medical Director

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

Takeda

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Huntsville, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Tuscon, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Anaheim, California, United States

Site Status

Azusa, California, United States

Site Status

Carmichael, California, United States

Site Status

Chula Vista, California, United States

Site Status

Cypress, California, United States

Site Status

Fresno, California, United States

Site Status

Garden Grove, California, United States

Site Status

Harrisburg, California, United States

Site Status

Irvine, California, United States

Site Status

Lancaster, California, United States

Site Status

Mission Hills, California, United States

Site Status

Oakland, California, United States

Site Status

Orange, California, United States

Site Status

Pasadena, California, United States

Site Status

San Diego, California, United States

Site Status

San Luis Obispo, California, United States

Site Status

Boulder, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Wheat Ridge, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Boynton Beach, Florida, United States

Site Status

Jupiter, Florida, United States

Site Status

Miami, Florida, United States

Site Status

New Smyma Beach, Florida, United States

Site Status

Ocala, Florida, United States

Site Status

St. Petersburg, Florida, United States

Site Status

Zephyrhills, Florida, United States

Site Status

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Honolulu, Hawaii, United States

Site Status

Boise, Idaho, United States

Site Status

Moline, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Oak Forrest, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Rockford, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Clive, Iowa, United States

Site Status

Lexington, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Metairie, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Chevy Chase, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Hollywood, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Lutherville, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Prince Federick, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Chaska, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Jackson, Mississippi, United States

Site Status

Jefferson City, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Washington, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Egg Harbor, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Site Status

Binghamton, New York, United States

Site Status

Rochester, New York, United States

Site Status

Greensboro, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

High Point, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Raleigh, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Bismarck, North Dakota, United States

Site Status

Dayton, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Mogadore, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States

Site Status

Medford, Oregon, United States

Site Status

Portland, Oregon, United States

Site Status

Duncansville, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Lansdale, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Anderson, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Bristol, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Chattanooga, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Germantown, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Jackson, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Kingsport, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Nashville, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Amarillo, Texas, United States

Site Status

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Site Status

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

San Antonio, Texas, United States

Site Status

Ogden, Utah, United States

Site Status

Charlottesville, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Chesapeake, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Spokane, Washington, United States

Site Status

Tacoma, Washington, United States

Site Status

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States

Site Status

Monroe, Wisconsin, United States

Site Status

Kippa-Ring, , Australia

Site Status

St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

Site Status

Newmarket, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Longueuil, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

Site Status

Hradec Králové, , Czechia

Site Status

Tallinn, , Estonia

Site Status

Riga, , Latvia

Site Status

Valmiera, , Latvia

Site Status

Kaunas, , Lithuania

Site Status

Panevezys, , Lithuania

Site Status

Vilnius, , Lithuania

Site Status

Bratislava, , Slovakia

Site Status

Nitra, , Slovakia

Site Status

Prešov, , Slovakia

Site Status

Sučany, , Slovakia

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States Australia Canada Czechia Estonia Latvia Lithuania Slovakia

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Metz DC, Howden CW, Perez MC, Larsen L, O'Neil J, Atkinson SN. Clinical trial: dexlansoprazole MR, a proton pump inhibitor with dual delayed-release technology, effectively controls symptoms and prevents relapse in patients with healed erosive oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Apr 1;29(7):742-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.03954.x. Epub 2009 Feb 7.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 19210298 (View on PubMed)

Peura DA, Metz DC, Dabholkar AH, Paris MM, Yu P, Atkinson SN. Safety profile of dexlansoprazole MR, a proton pump inhibitor with a novel dual delayed release formulation: global clinical trial experience. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Nov 15;30(10):1010-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04137.x. Epub 2009 Sep 4.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 19735233 (View on PubMed)

Wyrwich KW, Mody R, Larsen LM, Lee M, Harnam N, Revicki DA. Validation of the PAGI-SYM and PAGI-QOL among healing and maintenance of erosive esophagitis clinical trial participants. Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):551-64. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9620-x. Epub 2010 Feb 27.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 20195905 (View on PubMed)

Friedlander EA, Pallentino J, Miller SK, VanBeuge SS. The evolution of proton pump inhibitors for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2010 Dec;22(12):674-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2010.00578.x. Epub 2010 Nov 24.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 21129076 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2006-000419-90

Identifier Type: EUDRACT_NUMBER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

U1111-1113-9433

Identifier Type: REGISTRY

Identifier Source: secondary_id

T-EE05-135

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.